Dont' animals eat other animals?
Was Pencil on a vegan diet too?
shareI don't think basing our behavior an animals will lead us to a very enlightened society. The idea behind animal rights activism is we should use our cognitive superiority not to dominate and torture but to act as benevolent stewards. Also, as I'm sure you know, Peggy adopted a vegan lifestyle *after* and in a sense in response to Pencil's death.
share[deleted]
Good points, mhsmocktrial. Also, I have to say that I don't understand the argument that "animals eat other animals, so we should too." Last I checked, herbivorous animals do exist.
"Stwike him, Centuwion ... vewy Wuffwy!"
>>Also, I have to say that I don't understand the argument that "animals eat other animals, so we should too." Last I checked, herbivorous animals do exist. <<
And this sort of ludicrous rationale is exactly why people view vegans and animal rights people as the nuts you are.
>>The idea behind animal rights activism is we should use our cognitive superiority not to dominate and torture but to act as benevolent stewards.<<
The idea behind Animal Rights is Animal Rights. Or, as PETA's founding nutbar puts it, "Total Animal Liberation". It's a a childish and idiotic notion; animals cannot comprehend rights, even if you give them power to vote or hold office they're not going know they have it, much less what to do with it.
And the notion that Mother Nature needs humanity as her stewards -I don't even want to know what Disney *beep* you think that entails- is equally absurd.
[deleted]
Humans have been eating other animals for thousands of years and the plurality of thought has come to believe that one can be moral and still eat animals.
Those who fight against it may have admirable intentions, but they are fighting an uphill battle.
As an interesting aside to this notion I saw Fiona Apple (an avid animal rights activist) live in concert in an outdoor venue in Chicago. During the show she was constantly swatting flies. At one point she commented "I feel really guilty killing all these flies".
She may have felt guilty, but she didn't stop the show, she kept killing the flies, and I'm sure she cashed her check and moved on.
One might say, "Well, flies are not cows, or chickens". But isn't that drawing the same moral line at a different arbitrary point that is still cruel to living creatures, but somehow tolerable to her moral code?
I guess what I am trying to say is that humanity has deemed it ok to eat cows, chickens, etc, and to swat flies and step on ants as they pursue their lives.
Fiona Apple and other animal rights folks have set the bar at a different level, but they seem to tolerate their own hypocrisies when it suits their ambitions. In the end, the plurality of the humane moral code will guide most of us. And the plurality has spoken.
Morrissey may think meat is murder, but he murders millions of living creatures every time he walks the sidewalk. I guess he's drawn the line at a place to make all of us meat eaters look ugly, while he remains righteous. How convenient for him!
[deleted]
Swatting a fly doesn't do much in terms of pain? Huh? Flies don't feel pain? Having a gigantic hand rise out of nowhere to plaster your body on a piano isn't a painful way to die? Really?
Actually, I don't know what the cow or the fly feels, but I guess you do. I guess you know that killing a cow is painful to the cow, while splattering a fly on a piano is not painful to the fly. Again, you've set the bar at an arbitrary humane level that allows you to live and enjoy your life. In fact, you have the best of both worlds. Flies don't feel pain, so you can cream them with indifference. But oh those meat eaters. They are cruel heartless people who inflict pain on other living things. You've created a perfect little moral island for yourself.
Obviously, the abject hypocrisy of your post is laughable. Sorry, it just is. Reread your post. You can't help but agree. Swap the word fly out for the word cow and you'd be railing against your own post.
But hey, I respect your right to post and enjoy the discussion. Happy New Year.
It's a natural reaction to swat something flying in your face. It's not really normal to let insects fly all over you without swatting them away. But killing an animal for no reason isn't necessary and humans don't need animals for food. It's completely different. People shouldn't go around swatting flies for the fun of it - but if they are flying in your face then the natural thing to do is swat them away. Nobody can be 100% cruelty-free but we can try our best.
shareHumans have been eating other animals for thousands of years and the plurality of thought has come to believe that one can be moral and still eat animals.
There’s a difference between hunting animals for food to survive and the way we now breed large amounts of animals, keep them locked up in cramped poor conditions only for them to be killed in a factory. BUT I am not saying people who do eat meat lack morality. I’m sure lots of vegetarians do say things like that, but for me it’s my own personal choice not to eat meat. I don’t see people who do eat meat as bad people. I see the meat industry as bad and I don’t want to support it.
One might say, "Well, flies are not cows, or chickens". But isn't that drawing the same moral line at a different arbitrary point that is still cruel to living creatures, but somehow tolerable to her moral code?
Probably. But you seem like one of those people who feel guilty for eating meat and so try to bring down what vegetarians are doing to make yourself feel better. Also, Fiona Apple must be pretty heavy handed, because whenever I swat flies with my hand, it doesn’t kill them…
Morrissey may think meat is murder, but he murders millions of living creatures every time he walks the sidewalk. I guess he's drawn the line at a place to make all of us meat eaters look ugly, while he remains righteous. How convenient for him!
What so you think vegetiarians/vegans should just float above the sidewalk? Get real.
share